JLange2010
Well-Known Member
Hmmm, turns out that "a while back" was 2001, when that Woodenboat article was written. Nov/Dec issue. I guess "a few years" doesn't mean the same thing to a 20 year old as it does to someone in their 50's.
KentTeffeteller
Gimpus Stereophilus!
Chevrolet factory installed NAPCO 4x4 conversions in 1965. Interesting history. Many were also dealer installed after the fact too. Beautiful Bartender and that 1965 Chevrolet pickup is icing on the cake and both beautiful. Love the scenery in the background too. Thanks for sharing your slice of heaven.
you could be right about the Napco conversion being done from the factory. The documentation that came in the glove box showed the original owner took delivery of the truck at a Flint MI dealership and it was a 4x4 truck with the K-20 (as opposed to the C -20) designation . My factory reproduction shop manuals don't mention Napco conversation as I recall but do show reference to the "K" designation in many sections. The transfer case was manufactured by Rockwell, and the hubs by Dana Spicer. Later Chevrolet 4x4 trucks, even my 2006 4x4 still use the K designation. Sometime in the late 60's GM went to the non divorced transfer case. That could be when it was no longer a "conversion". I do know there are a hell of a lot of ujoints under that truck! All with grease fittings..
Hi Alobar, Beautiful boat, and very impressive that you built it yourself. There's no substitute for personally knowing every inch of a vehicle, that must give you a lot of confidence during use and maintenance.
Nice pickup also. Imho '60s era pickups are stone cold reliable and easy to repair and maintain. Don't knock that separate transfer case. In spite of having more u-joints to deal with I believe them to be a lot easier to drop out and repair than an integrated unit if/when that becomes necessary. I had a '66 Ford F250 4x4 for a number of years that had a Dana 24 separate transfer case. When it started to leak oil it was fairly easy to drop it and rebuild. This was in the mid '90s and the gears had no noticable wear so it was just new bearings and seals and back on the road. Over time I found that when it was time to replace u-joints I had much better service from Dana/Spicer parts than any cheaper stuff. They never broke or did any other nasty stuff.
Cheers,
James
Nice pickup also. Imho '60s era pickups are stone cold reliable and easy to repair and maintain. Don't knock that separate transfer case. In spite of having more u-joints to deal with I believe them to be a lot easier to drop out and repair than an integrated unit if/when that becomes necessary. I had a '66 Ford F250 4x4 for a number of years that had a Dana 24 separate transfer case. When it started to leak oil it was fairly easy to drop it and rebuild. This was in the mid '90s and the gears had no noticable wear so it was just new bearings and seals and back on the road. Over time I found that when it was time to replace u-joints I had much better service from Dana/Spicer parts than any cheaper stuff. They never broke or did any other nasty stuff.
Cheers,
James
Thanks for the boat complements. Yes there is something to be said about knowing the boat you are trusting your life in. It did take me a while to fully trust it, but after a few brushes with sudden very rough seas I have a lot more faith that all that System Three epoxy that went into it must be doing its job! I know one thing about the transfer case on my truck. It shifts into and out of 4 wheel drive like butter. The experience I had with a 1970 Chev was the opposite. Both hands on the shift lever and all the strength you could muster to shift those. I think leverage may have been partially to blame there. The shiftier barely traveled a half inch as I recall.
I agree about removing it and rebuilding. That part has got to be easier than an all in one tranny/transfer case.
2011etec
Super Member
Love your boat!Ive never built one myself though I have repaired ,sanded ,etc .Being a fresh water sailor I like cedarstrip built boats first and foremost but have an appreciation of all boats wooden.Heres a pic of one I owned just a year ago but sold due to not being right for my uses now.With the 90 she would hit 51.3 mph by gps with a very slight chop.I last used it with a 2011 60 hp etec evinrude which was perfect for her.Kept the 60 and sold the boat .
Last edited:
2011etec
Super Member
Boat was just a runabout designed by Giesler boat works of Powassan Ontario.17 feet,and approx540 lbs naked weight.They were originally rated for 75 hp but I had mine strengthened to handle the 90 which it did easily in all conditions and maneuvers.You will se lots of them in the Muskokas with mainly 40 hp motors on them and the run just fine being so light but they are not a rough water boat ,more of a cruiser for smaller type lakes .
Yeah, lots of different uses for lots of different boats. The definition of a boat, (other than a hole in the water into which you pour money into) is compromise. I would not want my boat for a lake unless it was one that got very rough. Nor would I take it out on a river for that matter. It is pretty good for a small sea boat tho.Boat was just a runabout designed by Giesler boat works of Powassan Ontario.17 feet,and approx540 lbs naked weight.They were originally rated for 75 hp but I had mine strengthened to handle the 90 which it did easily in all conditions and maneuvers.You will se lots of them in the Muskokas with mainly 40 hp motors on them and the run just fine being so light but they are not a rough water boat ,more of a cruiser for smaller type lakes .
Last edited:
Great! If you are coming up the inside passage through Haines and Skagway you will be going right by me! Hope the weather is good for your trip and you have a great time!
exhippy
I use to have long hair. Now I'm lucky to have any
20 years old? I've got shoes older than that...
GuyK
Addicted Member
I recall the same article, but would have to go dig it out to get a date.
http://bartenderboats.com/
This is the website for where you can get plans for the bartender. Also lots of photos of built "BT's", most of which are much nicer than mine. Also a section of history of the design which goes back 60 years.
KutzlerTrans
Jennie & I with Buddy and Barney.
Mr Alobar, you get my deepest respect for having a dream and following through with it. 
Thanks! I think I must have gotten the boat building bug from my Dad who built several boats of various types back in the 50's. In the 60' he wanted to build a 26 foot Bartender cabin cruiser with an inboard but never got the time. I like to think he would have approved of my efforts.Mr Alobar, you get my deepest respect for having a dream and following through with it.
BrocLuno
Lunatic Member
Thank you! It is just a 30hp Suzuki 4 stroke which is a little under powered for this boat. The recommendation for outboards for this hull is 25 to 50HP. This was a motor I pulled off another boat when I finished this one always with the idea that I would get a new 50hp outboard. Now 8 years later still running the 30 but it will be coming out sometime within the next year or 2. Even 50hp might seem under-powered for a boat this size and weight (aprox 1500 lbs with half tanks) but due to the fairly slender hull it really isn't. With the 30 I can get up to around 20 mph or a little more, with a 50 it would easily move along at 30+
Here are some better pictures of the outboard and well
Well done
